[sdiy] Moog SL-8

[David Moylan]

Ah, the 99/4A.  That was the first computer I ever coded on.  You could 
fairly easily program it to make sounds.  Having a cartridge slot 
definitely made it feel like a toy computer, but it set me on the path 
I'm still on today (programmer).  Was a gift from my uncle...

I miss the days of hooking your computer up to the spare TV.

On 04/14/2017 11:37 PM, rsdio at audiobanshee.com wrote:
>
> On Apr 14, 2017, at 1:33 PM, Michael Zacherl <sdiy-mz01 at blauwurf.info> wrote:
>> On 14.Apr 2017, at 8:54 , rsdio at audiobanshee.com wrote:
>>> On Apr 13, 2017, at 11:16 PM, Michael Zacherl <sdiy-mz01 at blauwurf.info> wrote:
>>>> On 14.Apr 2017, at 5:33 , w.james.meagher at gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> http://bitleymusic.blogspot.ca/?m=1
>>>>
>>>> I find that statement confusing (maybe just me):
>>>> "The SL-8 was based upon the TI 99/4 16 bit microcomputer and the SW development was done on the TMS 9900 development system."
>>>>
>>>> IMHO it’s the other way round, no?
>>>
>>> When he says, "based upon the TI 99/4 16 bit microcomputer," I assume what he means is, "based upon the same MCU chip as used in the popular TI 99/4 product."
>>>
>>> I also assume that there was a real TMS 9900 development system available from Texas Instruments. At least I hope they didn't expect companies who designed around their chip to use a toy computer with a 40-column all-caps display. Besides, what do you think TI used when designing the TI 99/4 product itself? There must have been a commercial development system for the TMS 9900. God, I hope so.
>>
>> Hm ...
>>
>> "It ran on the development system until two days before NAMM when I suggested that we try running it on a 99/4 in the socket instead of the emulation environment. There were numerous issues, but it actually ran on the IC computer instead of the emulation system before we left for NAMM.”
>>
>> reading that it doesn’t get better: without thinking too much about it I’d have assumed some sort of ICE, but reading again … no …
>> I did quick look-up on the net, no hints so far.
>
> I agree that the author is using confusing terms. We should give some leeway since this is a sales representative and not a technical person. I assume that the author is not Craig Anderton, who would presumably get the terminology right, even if just going from memory.
>
> That said, "emulation system" strongly implies that Texas Instruments offered something presumably more complex than the TI 99/4 toy computer for OEM use.
>
> We may never know. Let's just steal the ideas from the SL-8 and bump them up with modern capabilities!
>
> Brian
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at synth-diy.org
> http://synth-diy.org/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>